penpen wrote:The next big task: Using Perl, Python, PHP
There are portable versions available; as only 2 links are allowed, i misuse the code-blocks,
but i only link the portable perl version, as i the other portable programs don't look trustworthy (at least in my eyes):But these portables have a great disadvantage: They are really huge... the smallest is the strawberryperl:Code: Select all
http://strawberryperl.com/
seems to be trustworthy, because it is linked by: http://www.perl.org/
~ 100 MB (zipped), 315 MB (unzipped)
My user profile at work is limited to 128 MB, so i cannot use them there, even if i would want.
And if i had to solve tasks at work, i even would not download these software at home,
this is a bit strange. If you do have a need to program at work, although I don't know what's your profession. why is that a concern of installing the tools necessary for the job? another scenario, a company may already be running some web servers hosting PHP for example. why not leverage on the tools that are already there? this is just an example.
Like I said, if there is a legitimate business reason for doing some things, then evaluate the cost and benefits of using such tools in terms of maintainabiility + cost of development ( think LOC ) + others and get approval to use them.
But then again, if your environment or boss dictate only batch you can use, then so be it. Does it hurt you in any way that I post other types of solution that doesn't even affect you?
penpen wrote:In addition there are similar tools to do the same: JScript, VBScript, server sided XML/XSLT/JavaScript.
No need to download anything which, i think, most of the users would prefer.
again this is based on assumption and man made rules. Would it be no problem for you if Perl or Python or PHP comes bundled into a Window installation by default? or with an option for you to install? Installation is never a problem. Its the rules people make that is the problem.
penpen wrote:Next point for discussion: portable versions of wget (~450 KB) /sed (~ 77KB)
These sizes are much better, although i doubt i ever would use them for my own:
These programs could easily be programmed with JScript/C#;
i also have access to C++ at work, but i think that is an exception.
sed is stream editor. Its not just a simple string replacement tool and wget is a feature rich web crawler. why reinvent the wheel and waste time to code again? Just download and use and make sure download from trusted source. This is a universal issue to consider when downloading stuff (not just what you think about downloading portable perl)
penpen wrote:Finally my opinion about that all:
On a batch forum, a solutions may not bound on any specific language:
i have no problem in using perl, c++ assembler, or even whitespace,
or even more strange programming languages.
actually, I am only answering the TS, i don't remember I answer you. So there's no problem whether you want to use what tools. I am not interested really
penpen wrote:But every programmer should follow this rules (among others) of programming (in computer science terms): Minimal costs - maximum benefits.
So if a solution with pure batch is possible, pure batch should be preferred;
Pure batch == all that is listed here:If no pure batch solution seems to be/is possible then just use the next known solution with minimal costs:Code: Select all
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb490890.aspx
nowadays minimal costs can equate to minimal development time. pure batch? to do FTP? do send email?
AiroNG wrote:If the user of this forum doesn't say anything, then the only useful assumption is: He has nothing else but built in functionality.
that's only your assumption
penpen wrote:If a user want to allow for example a C++ solution, he should say: "I have access on a
C++ compiler, too."
this point I agree and it should be in a black and white rule.
penpen wrote:If he has access and doesn't inform us, it is not our task to figure that out.
your TS is the customer. If this forum has no customer, it will be dead. Providing services for customers is common sense.
penpen wrote:@berserker: I hope this anwers some of your questions, too: what is pure/native batch, why not first using Perl, and others.
no it doesn't. you are showing me what MS said. not what you said. What is your opinion on "what is the real meaning of batch" ? techinically its everything you can do with the tools you have. The deciding factor on this definition is whether one can relax the "rules" that batch is only for this and that, and not others , and also stop assuming TS that posts here are ignorant from the start.